User Score
6.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 97 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 55 out of 97
  2. Negative: 20 out of 97

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Sep 24, 2011
    4
    They say third time's a charm. Well, wait until you see "Scream 3", and then you WILL 'scream'.
  2. Dec 23, 2011
    1
    It has finally become what it has been making fun of the whole franchise. Sorry Wes Craven you just made this franchise have a bad reputation. It lacks scares, but gains in unintentional laughter. Wow I give this movie 14%.
  3. Jul 4, 2012
    3
    Unfortunatelly, Scream 3 had my hopes way too high. This story has a lot of plot holes, and lacks Kevin Williamson's creative ideas, who was replaced by a screenwritter, who I don't know how he managed to turn The Ring into an overall suspenful, yet scary movie. Ends up being a slap fade in the face for trilogies, because it is the typical mediocre third movie of a franchise. Still, Neve Campbell, David Arquette and Courtney Cox give their best performances in the whole series, but their overshadowed by the dreadful plot and the abuse of meta-humour!!
    I give this movie a 30 % just because of the main cast performances, the rest of the actors/characters are transparent, and you won't even rememeber them for a second!!!
    Expand
  4. Dec 4, 2010
    5
    'Scream 3' still has the familiar traits that made the first two films so dynamic, but the film as a whole proves that Ehren Krueger holds NOTHING to Kevin Williamson.
  5. Nov 20, 2011
    2
    I am glad that they stopped the franchise with this film (ending the trilogy) because its the same formula with no originality to it and its still too recycled from the first film. Acting is rather poor and they try far too hard to sell their parts and that results in quite a bit of overacting. The whole plot twist was rather stupid as well and sort of ruined the previous films because of it.
  6. Apr 19, 2011
    5
    Overall I Am Really Not Sure What To Score This Film..
    Scream Was Good, And Scream 2 Rocked, But Scream 3??
    Some Things In This Movie Were Done Very Well.. Neve Campbell Does A Great Job, As Well As Courtney Cox, But David Arquat Is A Very Bad Actor.. He Needed To Be Cut Off From Ruining This Movie.. Dewey Go!
    In Some Spots There Are Really Bad Writing.. But In Others Its Very, Very,
    Good...
    Overall This Is Not A Bad Movie Or A Good Movie.. It's Just A Movie :)
    Expand
  7. j30
    Nov 27, 2011
    1
    A poorly executed film that nearly fails on all levels. It's not scary, it's not funny or clever, it's just a drag.
  8. Sep 5, 2011
    7
    Ok, it's a step back, but it's still a fun movie. The horror element is a bit lost in the comedy side of it. It has some great moments. I found the movie got good from the house explosion and on-wards. Kevin's writing is sorely missed in this film, and so is Neve. Not enough screen time for her. All in all it's a good movie, but compared to the 'Scream Standards', it just falls short
  9. Dec 17, 2011
    3
    is the worst film in the Scream series is very annoying because the movie not the fear, the suspense that appears is not the same thing the other two films, the villain is a bit disjointed
  10. Sep 27, 2011
    6
    Well, the Scream films just keep going down in quality (Please God let the fourth one be good!!!) It had definite glaring flaws but it still was great fun to watch. Ghostface still has to earn his kills which is a nice thing to see, and there is a decent amount of cute comedy. The acting is pretty much the same all around. The screenplay was much weaker. There were some parts that were like "okay really? you could have done better than that." It was simply a good time all around. Nothing too special. I wouldn't rank it as high as the first or even the second. But it was fun. My advice: see it as a completion of the trilogy. Particularly if you are going to see the fourth one.


    TRIVIA TIME: 1. Wes Craven filmed three different endings and didn't tell the cast which one he was going to use.

    2. The bathroom Sidney finds Angelina in on the set of "Stab 3" is the same bathroom used when Sidney is attacked in the original Scream. You can tell by position of doors and soap dispenser design.

    3. Between Scream 2 and Scream 3, David Arquette and Courteney Cox (two of the five actors who feature in all the Scream movies) got married. They met on the set of the first movie, were an item whilst shooting the second and by the third they were married. Courteney added 'Arquette' to the end of her name, as can be seen in the credits. Courteney and David had to cut their honeymoon short to begin filming Scream 3.
    Expand
  11. Oct 21, 2011
    4
    While not a horrible film by any means, Scream 3 certainly doesn't live up to the heights established by its predecessors. It has its good moments, such as Parker Posey's performance as a whole, but all in all, it's not scary nor does it deliver any tension. This is a horror film, right? I didn't like how it took a more comedic route; it made the film dwell into self-parody.

    Not terrible
    (as aforementioned), but it definitely isn't good. Not even close. Expand
  12. Jul 15, 2012
    3
    The writing in this bad sequel isn't very good. It may have some clever and suspenseful moments, but moments are also rehashed from the first two and it's lame, predictable, and lacks the freshness of the first two. The new characters are also very boring (except Parkey Posey) but actors playing actors was just boring and there was a lack of a lot of character development. They should of done this with Kevin Williamson. Expand
  13. Jan 4, 2012
    3
    The Scream series ironically becomes what it is trying so hard to parody with this installment. It is in no way scary or interesting, and offers nothing to expand on the previous movies; rendering itself incapable of justifying its existence beyond being a cheap mockery of the first-film. The only things saving this from being a complete disaster are the performances of David Arquette and Patrick Warburton, who both come with an extra serving of both cheese and ham. Collapse
  14. Mar 2, 2012
    10
    much people say, "Scream 3 is the worst film of the saga", but no, is great, the character of Jennifer (Parker Possey) is the best of the saga. Scream 3 is fantastic. I love this third part.
  15. Jan 20, 2013
    10
    I'm gonna go against the crowd and say that this was my favorite installment of "Scream." It has a a good plot, a good music score, a great cast, everything that's suppose to be in a film. I also liked the small tastes of humor that were presented through out the film. Great movie! The "Scream" Trilogy is the best horror trilogy of all time.
  16. Oct 28, 2012
    3
    Wow tis movie is way more laughs than screams. Scream 3 3.5/10
  17. May 31, 2012
    3
    Sadly Not What I Wanted..
    Third Time's A Charm.. But Not In This Movie!
    Scream And Scream 2 Were Amazing But This Is Just Boring The Same Old Stuff.. Not Really A Plot At All....
    Stab.. Stab.. Stab..
    Worst Movie Of 2000!
  18. Nov 10, 2012
    3
    Scream 3 isn't scary, isn't funny and just isn't good at all. It's at least 20 minutes too long and there are too many actors in here. The screenplay is bad and the ending is no big surprise. #3 bored me very much and I still don't like the principle of the franchise. A killer with a halloween mask for kiddies? I can't take that seriously. Scream 3 is no complete rubbish but it's really not worth watching. Expand
  19. Nov 1, 2012
    5
    First time around, "Scream 3" is enjoyable and at times funnier than its predecessors. But by the second time, the film drags on-- it lacks the thrills and wit of the first two and instead trades it for more accessible humor that isn't as witty. The replacement of screenwriter Kevin Williamson was a huge mistake. Hopefully Craven has taken notes on what not to do since this film.
  20. Mar 3, 2013
    7
    Not as good as the first two. But it is still is very entertaining, funny and extremely unpredictable. It is a very honorable third chapter in this series.
  21. Jun 20, 2013
    7
    A good movie, but, probably my least favorite Scream. The ending felt too out of nowhere for a movie that is also supposed to be like a guessing game, and, the side characters were even less memorable than the second movie.
  22. Sep 16, 2013
    6
    This is where a series gets a little vulnerable and desperate, like a girl looking for a prom date. It tries very hard to get its point across, but it doesn't succeed past being average. The series is on its last leg, and the third one almost tripped it.
  23. Jan 10, 2014
    5
    Because of the unfortunate Columbine massacre, Dimension Studios wanted to cut down the amount of gore released in it's films, and Scream 3 was shot more as a 'whodunit' than a horror film. This was the filmmakers first mistake as the movie became a little more slapstick than horror. The overall error of this film was it became more a cliche than a commentary to the genre.
  24. Mar 12, 2014
    3
    Scream 3 just seems to be a rushed idea for another sequel in the Scream franchise that turned out to be a disappointment, and a really, really bad idea for another sequel.
Metascore
56

Mixed or average reviews - based on 32 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 32
  2. Negative: 7 out of 32
  1. 70
    It's plenty entertaining, but the ending is disappointing, given the buildup.
  2. 50
    Even if Scream 3 lacks the punch and verve of the first two installments, it manages to wring some ironically metaphysical comedy from the movie-within-a-movie motif.
  3. About the only thing the movie kills with any decisiveness is your time.